What is Science?
People are not always clear on what science is. Particularly:
- They confuse "science" with the "scientific method"; and
- They do not understand what constitutes verification of statements, laws, and principles in science and how that process works.
This article seeks to address those two confusions.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
—Arthur C. Clarke
Science
Definition of Science: A science is a body of organized knowledge that describes and models the nature and functioning of an area of life, thereby permitting prediction and control of that area (which is power).
A science basically consists of two areas of data: BEing and DOing.
- BEing: Descriptions of the nature of things, the "what" they are.
- DOing: Descriptions of their relationships and interactions, which are primarily the Laws of Cause and Effect.
Notice the phrase "control of that area" in the definition of science above. Control is another name for Power. Power is the ability to produce the desired results. Knowledge is Power: knowledge selects the correct actions to take to produce any given result, and then guides the application of efforts to the successful conclusion: the result desired. The saying "Knowledge is Power" is the same as "Science is Power."
Technology: Technology is the means and methods, procedures and systems, and the equipment to apply science to produce the desired results. Technology is science at work. Technology is "Science in Action equals Power."
The Scientific Method
The method of discovering or compiling a science, the "scientific method," is not the body of knowledge that is a science. Science is Know: the scientific method is the "DO": to acquire that knowledge.
The scientific method is basically:
- Observation of a phenomenon (energy, matter, or change)
- Hypothesis as to the nature or causes of that phenomenon
- Design of an experiment to test that hypothesis.
- Execution of the experiment.
- Confirmation or negation of the hypothesis
- New hypothesis and repeat steps 3 to 6.
- Accumulation of enough verified hypotheses to derive a general theory, laws, and principles.
Although you might think that the scientific method is strictly rational and logical, it is not. It is primarily intuitive. The appearance of hypotheses in the mind is an intuitive or creative process. Hypotheses do not come from prior knowledge, but spring up in the mind out of the unknown when sought. By their nature, they are previously unknown ideas that suggest a direction of experimentation to expand the known. The validity of the hypothesis is then checked by rational means.
The second common misunderstanding that people have about science is regarding the process of proof—or at least validation—of scientific claims and statements. The original discoverer of a datum will often have made hundreds or thousands of experiments and observations that lead to his statement of a principle or process. However, these do not constitute proof.
In science, one person makes a formal statement or claim to the world, not as an opinion or viewpoint, but as a fact about the nature of the universe. Although such statements are usually based on extensive experimentation by that person (as he has his reputation staked on it); it does not matter scientifically how he came to make his statement. He can decline to name the source, or say the idea came from divine revelation, his fairy godmother, extra-terrestrial telepathy, whatever, if he so desires. The decider of scientific validity is NEVER the source of the claim, neither by authority, nor by the data he presents—science is famous for hoaxes.
Science works by others then examining and testing the claims to see if they can reproduce the predicted result (phenomenon). If a statement is correct, anyone who repeats the experiment will get the same result. The validation of a statement in science is that others, in independent testing, can produce the same results and so verify the statement. It is not the data of the original researcher that is the determination of science, of Truth; it is duplicability, replicate-ability, by others.
A statement in science stands as valid unless and until another person can present evidence showing the original statement to be incorrect or inadequate in some way. That counter-evidence is then subject to testing to determine its validity.
This independent testing is particularly important in psycanic science because we are dealing with non-physical, personal, and therefore subjective and often fleeting phenomena. Physical science deals with objective, measurable phenomena, much of which can be collected and saved for years. Psycanic science poses a much greater scientific study problem than physical science.* *It should be noted, however, that quantum physics is now showing that there is no such thing as objective phenomena: it is all subjective. Its personal phenomena (e.g. thoughts, emotions, identities, etc.) can not be detected or experienced by others—they can only experience their own. There is no way to record a test, a discreation, or save a "sample," a single thought for example, to show others. Furthermore, just the observation and the experience of these phenomena changes them and even discreates them. Although it has taken 20 years and thousands of observations of human beings to discover some of the laws and principles of psycanics, the phenomena observed are not recordable or preserve-able to show others.
Fortunately, as explained above, the original research results are not only not necessary to establish the scientific validity of Psycanics; they are irrelevant. Independent testing is the criteria. Each person can make the experiments and observations necessary to verify the principles of psycanics for himself. As we are dealing with personal, non-physical phenomena, this is the only way it can be tested. And, that independent testing is the basis of science, not the experiments of the original researcher.
If a person doubts any law or principle of psycanics, then s/he must test its validity (and should contact Psycanics for the protocols for doing so). Any statement impugning the laws of any science without such tests is only personal opinions or beliefs and these have no place in science. That is, in fact, one of the purposes of science: to eradicate personal opinions and beliefs.
You will find a more in-depth discussion of science and the scientific method at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method.
Hard versus Soft Science
"Hard" and "soft" science are not formal scientific terms, but are ones in common usage for anyone who has even begun to study the Philosophy of Science. A hard science is one where the laws and principles are well defined (stated in laws and principles) and are rigid and predictable as to the results produced. The hardest of all sciences is mathematics which is very precise, and stated in formulas and equations. Mathematics is also the language of the other "hard" sciences, the physical sciences including physics, chemistry, thermodynamics, fluid dynamics (hydraulics), aerodynamics, geology, etc. These all obey exact laws and principles and give a great deal of control over their areas.
As we move into dealing with life and especially with non-physical phenomena, the sciences tend to become "softer." There are fewer "hard" (definite) statements of laws; there are more theories and even personal opinions about the causes of phenomena. The results of applying that science are much less controllable and predictable. Soft sciences include psychology, sociology, politics, economics, anthropology, interpretive archeology, and even meteorology. There are numerous reasons why a science is soft instead of hard: dealing with living things, complexity of the area, insufficient data (archeology), insufficient knowledge of the internal workings of the area, inability to accumulate sufficient data to form a hypothesis, or inability to test the hypotheses.
Psycanics hardens the soft sciences of psychology, philosophy, and spirituality by bringing forth invariable laws, formulas, equations and newly discovered cause-effect relationships. It is a much harder science of the non-physical aspects of life than heretofore known. The claims of psycanics stand ready for any person to examine and test. Under the laws of science, they are valid unless and until someone can present evidence that they are not valid, which evidence must then stand up to testing.
Top of Page
